>Babby's first fantasy book
>Mom bought me a copy of Harry Potter and the Sorcerers Stone at the height of it's popularity
>"Why don't you read this, anon? They say it's really good and all the other kids love it!"
>Read the first few chapters
>Boring, poorly written, lowest common denominator fucking trash I had come across in quite a while
>Toss it under my bed and forget about it
Never again. Fuck you casual kiddies that slurp up this fucking trash.
Yes. The quality of /lit/ has declined since /his/ was made so sharply it's painful. Most of the old guard have re-set up camp there because of the humanities discussion, and it has more classic /lit/ memes than /lit/ itself.
/his/ also cannibalized the history discussions from /int/ and the few remaining intelligent parts from /pol/. It's a wonderful board, but the cost was so high.
>It's a wonderful board, but the cost was so high
True. I used to be a mainboard /lit/izen and left once /his/ was established. Just came back after not visiting /lit/ for a few months. It has changed a lot. For the worse, that is.
This is dumb. The weakest part of the story was the epilogue. There are much more interesting parts that could have been explored. Marauders, DubledorexGrindelwald, founders of Hogwarts, Drumstrang, adventures of Luna
What's happening is part of a phenomenon I wrote about a couple of years ago when I was asked to comment on Rowling. I went to the Yale University bookstore and bought and read a copy of "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone." I suffered a great deal in the process. The writing was dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs." I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing.
But when I wrote that in a newspaper, I was denounced. I was told that children would now read only J.K. Rowling, and I was asked whether that wasn't, after all, better than reading nothing at all? If Rowling was what it took to make them pick up a book, wasn't that a good thing?
It is not. "Harry Potter" will not lead our children on to Kipling's "Just So Stories" or his "Jungle Book." It will not lead them to Thurber's "Thirteen Clocks" or Kenneth Grahame's "Wind in the Willows" or Lewis Carroll's "Alice."
Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.
Our society and our literature and our culture are being dumbed down, and the causes are very complex. I'm 73 years old. In a lifetime of teaching English, I've seen the study of literature debased. There's very little authentic study of the humanities remaining. My research assistant came to me two years ago saying she'd been in a seminar in which the teacher spent two hours saying that Walt Whitman was a racist. This isn't even good nonsense. It's insufferable.
I look forward to your review of Spot the Dog
How is that a response? He's saying you're a stupid fat fucking baby, in case you missed it. Are you saying that only reddit would miss your genius, your keenness of insight?
JK Rowling and the Quest for Relevance
Hermionie ends up looking like this by the end of the book.
I can't really understand why people would choose to read 7 fucking books of Harry Potter, I mean what the fuck is wrong with people its not even entertaining
It was entertaining when I was 14 for sure. The thing that gets me is I know so, so many people in their mid twenties who consider the Harry Potter books their all-time favourites. Like even when I was that age it wasn't even my favourite YA series about magic.
The first four or five books were pretty entertaining when I was a kid
They were pretty much the only books outside of elementary school assigned reading that kids could to to each other about. Nobody really read for fun unless it was harry potter, and that trend basically continued and carried into my adult life.
I'm not saying it's good but that's my anecdotal explanation
I was excited, until I realized this is just gonna be a basic broadway-to-book thing. They will market it as an 8th Potter book but it's just a group effort to adapt a play into a (assuredly short) novel
>My research assistant came to me two years ago saying she'd been in a seminar in which the teacher spent two hours saying that Walt Whitman was a racist. This isn't even good nonsense. It's insufferable.
That's cancerous PC culture infesting our schools. Nobody thinks that kind of shit should be allowed except college kiddies
"OMG OMG OMG OMG THERE WILL BE 8TH HARRY POTTER !!!!!!! IM GOING TO TO SEE DA MUSICAL, BUY THE BOOK AND WAIT FOR DA MOVIE!!!!"
i rather that kids will drink alcohol and smoke cigs then read this bullshit and think they are deep and high culture...
She wrote that book "for adults" which flopped really, really hard. I hadn't heard a peep from Potterfans until Pottermore and then after that, nothing. After the books finished there were like 3 hit broadway shows centered around it
can anyone explain why every single play is now a broadway hit
or "the #1 musical hit"
seriously every single show is "the #1" or "the hit show" like nothing is ever NOT a hit on broadway
I actually tried to read this book after checking it out from the library. I was 11 or 12, I think? Close to there and the preferred audience of it. Couldn't even make it past the first chapter. Went back and reread The Hobbit.
Autistic has replaced every other mental illness on 4chan for years now.
>I have a strong opinion on this!
>I don't feel strongly about this.
>I don't care about this at all
>I know a lot about this subject I'm passionate about!
>I'm a fan of this obscure author/genre
>I read/game/watch tv and films a lot
>I think I'm better than you
>I think I'm not as good as you
it just goes on, but you get the idea.
Interesting, considering many in the spectrum don't give a shit about their outward reputation. It's not like it's an effective strategy. Been hanging round /x/ too long where it's always schizophrenia, and that stops people, cause maybe they are being delusional. autistic doesn't care that we care too much or are too passionate. that's our good traits.
what autistics have you met? Texture issues, no autistic would do that. MR maybe.
>what autistics have you met?
You've obviously never seen a full blown autist. One of my classrooms at high school was next to the 'special learning center', my god I've seen some some shit
>She wrote that book "for adults" which flopped really, really hard.
Do you mean The Casual Vacancy? That book was a commercial success and the reviews were fairly good if not exceptional. Since then she's written three detective novels in her Cormoran Strike series which have been generally well-received.
I couldn't get into that book at all but I've found her detective novels pretty entertaining to be honest. Her prose is fairly mediocre but the characters are well-drawn and she has a real talent for mystery plotting (something I always thought stood out in the early HP novels, actually). They're worth checking out if you're looking for some light reading to keep you entertained for a few days or so.
I hated the mystery plotting in HP. I mean she didn't royally screw up, but the red herrings were so annoying and so many dropped subplots and strings of info that never resolved into anything. Red herrings for the sake of having one, instead of organic from what happens in life or organic to other pieces of the story. It's no agatha christie, let say that. But maybe she was able to keep it straight in a shorter novel?
There's tonnes of discussion about history on /tg/.
It's all about the actual history, though, rather than historiography/causation/&c. I.e. it's about swords and wars, rather than anything more humanities related. It's also only about the actually interesting bits with Mongols rather than panzers, so if you're a Wehraboo you'll probably find it boring.
>love Harry Potter
>literally the only books I read outside of school until I got into literature at 16
>stayed up the til midnight for my 11th birthday hoping I got a letter from Hogwarts
>never read the books again after the 7th one came out.
I am embarrassed that there are adults excited for this. I have absolutely no desire to read this. I liked Harry Potter... when I was a child. It's a children's book.
Eh, Harry Potter was certainly around when I was growing up and some of the movies were good. Not spending stupid money on an extortionate play (two fucking parts, really?) but I'm happy to read the script - as someone who's worked in theatre/on stage I'm excited to envision my own version.
Wonder how many people will be butthurt once they realize that it's not HP 8.
>bitches about a book he never read with maximum autism
>I went to the Yale University bookstore and bought and read a copy of "Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone."
The insecurity is real.
She got mostly positive reviews for her adult novels.
Could you name any examples? Considering that these are books for children, the only issue with plotting seem to be the deus ex machinas.